Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Arctic Home in the Vedas c8: Chapter V. The Vedic Dawns

The Arctic Home in the Vedas c8

Language
English

Contents

Chapter V. The Vedic Dawns

c8.1

Dawn-hymns the most beautiful in the Rig-Veda —The Deity fully described, unobscured by personification —First hints about the long duration of dawn —Recitation of a thousand verses, or even the whole Rig-Veda, while the dawn lasts —Three or five-fold division of the dawn —Both imply a long dawn —The same inferred from the two words Ushas and Vyushti —Three Rig-Vedic passages about long dawns, hitherto misunderstood, discussed —Long interval of several days between the first appearance of light and sunrise —Expressly mentioned in the Rig-Veda, VII, 76, 3 —Sâyana's explanation artificial and unsatisfactory —Existence of many dawns before sunrise —Reason why dawn is addressed in the plural in the Rig-Veda —The plural address not honorific —Nor denotes dawns of consecutive days —Proves a team of continuous dawns —The last view confirmed by the Taittirîya Samhitâ, IV, 3, 11 —Dawns as 30 sisters —Direct authority from the Taittirîya Brâhmana for holding that they were continuous or unseparated —Sâyana's explanation of 30 dawns examined —Thirty dawns described as thirty steps of a single dawn—Rotatory motion of the dawn, like a wheel, directly mentioned in the Rig-Veda —Their reaching the same appointed place day by day —All indicate a team of thirty closely-gathered dawns —Results summed up —Establish the Polar character of the Vedic dawns —Possible variation in the duration of the Vedic dawn —The legend of Indra shattering the Dawn's car explained —Direct passages showing that the dawns so described were the events of a former age —The Vedic Dawns Polar in character.

c8.2

The Rig-Veda, we have seen, does not contain distinct references to a day and a night of six months' duration, though the deficiency is more than made up by parallel passages from the Iranian scriptures. But in the case of the dawn, the long continuous dawn with its revolving splendours, which is the special characteristic of the North Pole, there is fortunately no such difficulty. Uṣas, or the Goddess of Dawn, is an important and favourite Vedic deity, and is celebrated in about twenty hymns of the Rig-Veda, and mentioned more than three hundred times, sometimes in the singular and sometimes in the plural. These hymns, according to Muir, are amongst the most beautiful,—if not the most beautiful,—in the entire collection; and the deity, to which they are addressed, is considered by Macdonell to be the most graceful creation of Vedic poetry, there being no more charming figure in the descriptive religious lyrics of any other literature.¹ In short, Uṣas, or the Goddess of Dawn, is described in the Rig-Veda hymns with more than usual fulness, and what is still more important for our purpose is that the physical character of the deity is not, in the least, obscured by the description or the personification in the hymns. Here, therefore, we have a fine opportunity of proving the validity of our theory, by showing, if possible, that the oldest description of the dawn is really Polar in character. A priori it does not look probable that the Vedic poets could have gone into such raptures over the short-lived dawn of the tropical or the temperate zone, or that so much anxiety about the coming dawn should have been evinced, simply because the Vedic bards had no electric light or candles to use during the short night of less than 24 hours. But the dawn-hymns have not, as yet, been examined from this stand-point. It seems to have been tacitly assumed by all interpreters of the Vedas, Eastern and Western, that the Uṣas of the Rig-Veda can be no other than the dawn with which we are familiar in the tropical or the temperate zone. That Yāska and Sāyaṇa thought so is natural enough, but even the Western scholars have taken the same view, probably under the influence of the theory that the plateau of Central Asia was the original home of the Aryan race. Therefore several expressions in the dawn-hymns, which would have otherwise suggested the inquiry regarding the physical or the astronomical character of the Vedic dawn, have been either ignored, or some-how explained away, by scholars, who could certainly have thrown more light on the subject, had they not been under the influence of the assumption mentioned above. It is with passages like these that we are here chiefly concerned, and we shall presently see that if these are interpreted in a natural way, they fully establish the Polar nature of the Vedic dawn.

c8.3

¹ See Muir's Original Sanskrit Texts, Vol. V, p. 181; and Macdonell's Vedic Mythology, p. 46.

c8.4

The first hint, regarding the long duration of the Vedic dawn, is obtained from the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa, IV, 7. Before commencing the Gavâm-ayana sacrifice, there is a long recitation of not less than a thousand verses, to be recited by the Hotṛi priest. This Ashvina-shastra, as it is called, is addressed to Agni, Uṣhas and Ashvins, which deities rule at the end of the night and the commencement of the day. It is the longest recitation to be recited by the Hotṛi, and the time for reciting it is after midnight, when "the darkness of the night is about to be relieved by the light of the dawn," (Nir. XII, 1; Ashv. Shr. Sûtra, VI, 5, 8).¹ The same period of time is referred to also in the Rig-Veda, VII, 67, 2 and 3. The shastra is so long, that the Hotṛi, who has to recite it, is directed to refresh himself by drinking beforehand melted butter after sacrificing thrice a little of it, (Ait. Br. IV, 7; Ashv. Shr. Sutra, VI, 5, 3). "He ought to eat ghee," observes the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa, "before he commences repeating. Just as in this world a cart or a carriage goes well if smeared (with oil),² thus his repeating proceeds well if he be smearwith ghee (by eating it).” It is evident that if such recitation has to be finished before the rising of the sun, either the Hotṛi must commence his task soon after midnight when it is dark, or the duration of the dawn must have been sufficiently long to enable the priest to finish the recitation in time, after commencing to recite it on the first appearance of light on the horizon as directed. The first supposition is out of question, as it is expressly laid down that the shastra is not to be recited until the darkness of the night is relieved by light. So between the first appearance of light and the rise of the sun, there must have been, in those days, time enough to recite the long laudatory song of not less than a thousand verses. Nay, in the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ (II, 1, 10, 3) we are told that sometimes the recitation of the shastra, though commenced at the proper time, ended long before sunrise, and in that case, the Saṁhitâ requires that a certain animal sacrifice should be performed. Ashvalâyana directs that in such a case the recitation should be continued upto sunrise by reciting other hymns (Ashv. S. S. VI, 5, 8 ); while Âpastamba, (S. S. XIV, 1 and 2), after mentioning the sacrifice referred to in the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, adds that all the ten Maṇḍalas of the Ṛig-Veda may be recited, if necessary, in such a case.¹ It is evident from this that the actual rising of the sun above the horizon was a phenomenon often delayed beyond expectation, in those days; and in several places in the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, (II, 1, 2, 4),² we are told that the Devas had to perform a *prâyaschitta* because the sun did not shine as expected.

c8.5

¹ Nir. XII, 1,—तयोः काल ऊर्ध्वमर्धरात्रात्प्रकाशीभावस्यानुविष्टंभम् ।

c8.6

² See Haug's Translation of Ait. Br., p. 270.

c8.7

¹ The Sûtras referred to are as follows:—Ashv. S. S. VI, 5, 8, तरनुवाकन्यायेन तस्यैव समाम्नायस्य सहस्रवममोदेतेः शंसेत्। Âpastamba XIV, 1 & 2 — यस्याश्विने शस्यमाने सूर्यो नाविर्भवति सौर्ये बहुरूपमाल-भ ॥ १ ॥ सर्वा अपि दाशतयीरनुब्रूयात् ॥ २ ॥ The first of these two sutras is the reproduction of T. S. II, 1, 10, 3.

c8.8

² T. S. II, 1, 2, 4,—असावादित्यो न व्यरोचत तस्मै देवाः प्रायश्चित्ति-मच्छन्। Cf. also T. S. II, 1, 4, 1.

c8.9

Another indication of the long duration of the dawn is furnished by the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, VII, 2, 20.¹ Seven oblations are here mentioned, one to *Uṣhas*, one to *Vyuṣhṭi*, one to *Udeṣhyat*, one to *Udyat*, one to *Uditâ*, one to *Suvarga* and one to *Loka*. Five of these are evidently intended for the dawn in its five forms. The Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa (III, 8, 16, 4) explains the first two, *viz.*, to *Uṣhas* and *Vyuṣhṭi*, as referring to dawn and sunrise, or rather to night and day, for according to the Brâhmaṇa, "*Uṣhas* is night, and *Vyuṣhṭi* is day."² But even though we may accept this as correct, and take *Uṣhas* and *Vyuṣhṭi* to be the representatives of night and day, because the former signalises the end of the night and the latter the beginning of the day, still we have to account for three oblations, *viz.*, one to the dawn about to rise (*Udeṣhyat*), one to the rising dawn (*Udyat*), and one to the dawn that has risen (*Uditâ*), the first two of which are, according to the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa, to be offered before the rising of the sun. Now the dawn in the tropical zone is so short that the three-fold distinction between the dawn that is about to rise, the dawn that is rising, and one that has risen or that is full-blown (*vi-uṣhṭi*), is a distinction without a difference. We must, therefore, hold that the dawn, which admitted such manifold division for the practical purpose of sacrifice, was a long dawn.

c8.10

¹ T. S. VII, 2, 20,—उषसे स्वाहा व्युष्ट्यै स्वाहोद्यते स्वाहोद्यते स्वाहोदिताय स्वाहा सुवर्गाय स्वाहा लोकाय स्वाहा ।

c8.11

² Tait. Br. III, 8, 16, 4, explains the above passage as follows.—उषसे स्वाहा व्युष्ट्यै स्वाहेत्याह । रात्रिवी उषाः । अहर्व्युष्टिः । अहोरात्रे एवावरुन्धे । अथो अहोरात्रयोरेव प्रतितिष्ठति । ता यदुभयीर्दिवा वा नक्तं वा जुहुयात् अहोरात्रे मोहयेत् । उषसे स्वाहा व्युष्ट्यै स्वाहोद्यते स्वाहोद्यते स्वाहेत्यनुद्रुत्य जुहोति । उदिताय स्वाहा सुवर्गाय स्वाहा लोकाय स्वाहेत्युदिते जुहोति ।

c8.12

The three-fold division of the dawn does not seem to be unknown to the poets of the Rig-Veda. For, in VIII, 1, 3, Varuna's "dear ones are said to prospered the three dawns for him,"¹ and by the phrase tisraḥ dānuchitrāḥ in I, 174, 7, 'three due-lighted' dawns appear to be referred to. There are other passages in the Rig-Veda² where the dawn is asked not to delay, or tarry long, lest it might be scorched like a thief by the sun (V, 79, 9); and in II, 5, 6, the steeds of the dawn are said to be 'slow' (aja-asaḥ), showing that the people were sometimes tired to see the dawn lingering long on the horizon. But a still more remarkable statement is found in I, 113, 13, where the poet distinctly asserts,³ "the Goddess Uṣhas dawned continually or perpetually (shasvat) in former days (purā);" and the adjective shashvat-tamā (the most lasting) is applied to the dawn in I, 118, 11. Again the very existence and use of two such words as uṣhas and vi-uṣhṭi is, by itself, a proof of the long duration of the dawn; for, if the dawn was brief, there was no practical necessity of speaking of the full-blown state (vi+uṣhṭi) of the dawn as has been done several times in the Rig-Veda. The expression, uṣhasaḥ vi-uṣhṭau, occurs very often in the Rig-Veda, and it has been translated by the phrase, "on the flashing forth of the dawn." But no one seems to have raised the question why two separate words, one of which is derived from the other simply by prefixing the preposition vi, should be used in this connection. Words are made to denote ideas, and if uṣhas and vi-uṣhṭi were not required to denote two distinct phenomena, no one, especially in those early days, would have cared to use a phrase, which, for all ordinary purposes, was superfluously cumbrous. But these facts, howsoever suggestive, may not be regarded as conclusive, and we shall, therefore, now turn to the more explicit passages in the hymns regarding the duration of the Vedic dawn.

c8.13

¹ Rig. VIII, 41, 3,—स क्षपः परि षस्वजे...तस्य वेनीर्नु व्रतमुषस्तिस्रो अवर्धयन् ।

c8.14

² Rig. V, 79, 9,—व्युच्छा दुहितर्दिवो मा चिरं तनुथा अपः । नेत्त्वा स्तेनं यथा रिपुं तपाति सूरो अर्चिषा ।

c8.15

³ Rig. I, 113, 13,—शश्वत्पुरोषा व्युवास देवी ।

c8.16

¹ Rig. I, 113, 10,—कियात्या यत्समया भवति या व्युष्युश्च नूनं व्युच्छान् । अनु पूर्वाः कृपते वावशाना प्रदीध्याना जोषमन्याभिरिति ॥

c8.17

The first verse I would quote in this connection is Rig-Veda I, 113, 10:—

c8.18

*Kiyâti â yat samayâ bhavâti*
*yâ vyûṣhur yâsh cha nûnaṁ vyuchhân |*
*Anu pûrvâḥ kṛipate vâvashânâ*
*pradîdhyânâ josham anyâbhir eti ||*

c8.19

The first quarter of the verse is rather difficult. The words are *kiyâti â yat samayâ bhavâti*, and Sâyaṇa, whom Wilson follows, understands *samayâ* to mean ‘near.’ Prof. Max Muller translates *samayâ* (Gr. Omos, Lat. Simul,) by ‘together,’ ‘at once’; while Roth, Grassmann and Aufrecht take *samayâ bhavâti* as one expression meaning ‘that which intervenes between the two.’² This has given rise to three different translations of the verse :—

c8.20

² See Petersberg Lexicon, and Grassmann's Worterbuch, s. v. Samayâ; and Muir's O. S. Texts, Vol. V., p. 189.

c8.21

WILSON, (following Sâyaṇa) :—For how long a period is it that the dawns have arisen? For how long a period will they rise? Still desirous to bring us light, Uṣhas pursues the functions of those that have gone before, and, shining brightly, proceeds with the others (that are to follow).

c8.22

GRIFFITH, (following Max Muller):—How long a time, and they shall be together,—Dawns that have shone and Dawns to shine hereafter? She yearns for former Dawns with eager longing, and goes forth gladly shining with the others.

c8.23

MUIR, (following Aufrecht) :—How great is the interval that lies between the Dawns which have arisen, and those which are yet to rise? Uṣhas yearns longingly after the former Dawns, and gladly goes on shining with the others (that are to come).

c8.24

But in spite of these different renderings, the meaning of the verse, so far as the question before us is concerned, can be easily gathered. There are two sets of dawns, one of those that have past, and the other of those that are yet to shine. If we adopt Wilson's and Griffith's translations, the meaning is that these two classes of dawns, taken together, occupy such a long period of time as to raise the question,—How long they will be together? In other words, the two classes of dawns, taken together, were of such a long duration that men began to question as to when they would teminate, or pass away. If, on the other hand, we adopt Aufrecht's translation, a long period appears to have intervened between the past and the coming dawns; or, in other words, there was a long break or hiatus in the regular sequence of these dawns. In the first case, the description is only possible if we suppose that the duration of the dawns was very long, much longer than what we see in the temperate or the tropical zone; while in the second, a long interval between the past and the present dawns must be taken to refer to a long pause, or night, occurring immediately before the second set of dawns commenced their new course, —a phenomenon which is possible only in the Arctic regions. Thus whichever interpretation we adopt—a long dawn, or a long night between the two sets of dawns,— the description is intelligible, only if we take it to refer to the Polar conditions previously mentioned. The Vedic passages, discussed hereafter, seem, however, to support Sâyaṇa's or Max Muller's view. A number of dawns is spoken of, some past and some yet to come; and the two groups are said to occupy a very long interval. That seems to be the real meaning of the verse. But without laying much stress on any particular meaning for the present, it is enough for our purpose to show that, even adopting Aufrecht’s rendering, we cannot escape from the necessity of making the description refer to the Polar conditions. The verse in question is the tenth in the hymn, and it may be noticed that in the 13th verse of the same hymn we are told that “in former days, perpetually (*shashvat*) did the Goddess Uṣas shine,” clearly indicating that the Dawn, in early days, lasted for a long time.

c8.25

The following verse is, however, still more explicit, and decisive on the point. The seventh Maṇḍala of the Rig-Veda contains a number of dawn-hymns. In one of these (VII, 76), the poet, after stating in the first two verses that the Dawns have raised their banner on the horizon with their usual splendour, expressly tells us, (verse 3), that a period of several days elapsed between the first appearance of the dawn on the horizon and the actual rising of the sun that followed it. As the verse¹ is very important for our purpose, I give below the Pada text with an interlineal word for word translation:—

c8.26

¹ Rig. VII, 76, 3,—तानीदहानि बहुल्यान्यासन् या प्राचीनमुदिता सूर्यस्य । यतः परि जार इवाचरंत्युषो ददृक्षे न पुनर्यतीव ॥

c8.27

| *Tâni* | *it* | *ahâni* | *bahulâni* | *âsan* |
| Those | verily | days | many | were |
| *yâ* | *prâchînam* | | *ud-itâ* | *sûryasya* |
| which | aforetime | | on the uprising | of the sun |
| *Yataḥ* | *pari* | *jâre-iva* | | *â-charantî* |
| from which | after | towards a lover, like | | moving on |
| *Uṣaḥ* | *dadṛikṣe* | *na* | *punaḥ* | *yatî-iva* |
| O Dawn! | wast seen | not | again | forsaking (woman), like |

c8.28

I have followed Sâyaṇa in splitting *jâra-iva* of the *Saṃhitâ* text into *jâre+iva*, and not *jâraḥ+iva* as Śâkala as done in the *Pada* text; for *jâre+iva* makes the simile more appropriate than if we were to compare *uṣhas* with *jâraḥ*. Literally rendered the verse, therefore, means, "Verily, many were those days, which were aforetime at the uprising of the sun, and about which, O Dawn! thou hast seen moving on, as towards a lover, and not like one (woman) who forsakes." I take *pari* with *yataḥ*, meaning that the dawn goes after the days. *Yataḥ pari*, thus construed, means 'after which,' or 'about which.' Sâyaṇa takes *pari* with *dadṛikṣhe*, and Griffith renders *yataḥ* by 'since.' But these constructions do not materially alter the meaning of the second half of the verse, though taking *pari* with *yataḥ* enables us to take the second line as an adjectival clause, rendering the meaning more plain. In IV, 52, 1, the Dawn is said to shine after her sister (*svasuḥ pari*), and *pari*, with an ablative, does not necessarily denote 'from' in every case, but is used in various senses, as, for instance, in III, 5, 10, where the phrase *Bhṛigubhyaḥ pari* occurs, and is rendered by Grassmann as equivalent to 'for the sake of Bhṛigus,' while Sâyaṇa paraphrases *pari* by *paritaḥ* 'round about.' In the verse under consideration we can, therefore, take *pari* with *yataḥ*, and understand the expression as meaning 'after, about or around which (days).' It must also be borne in mind that there must be an expression to correspond with *jâre* in the simile, and this we get only if we construe *yataḥ pari* in the way proposed above. If we now analyse the verse it will be found to be made up of three clauses, one principal and two adjectival. The principal statement asserts that those days were many. The demonstrative 'those' (*tâni*) is then followed by two relative clauses, *yâ prâchînam* &c., and *yataḥ pari* &c. The first of these states that the days referred to in the principal clause were those that 'preceded the rising of the sun.' But if the days preceded the rising of the sun, one might think that they were pervaded with darkness. The poet, therefore, further adds, in the second relative clause, that though these days were anterior to the rising of the sun, yet they were such that ‘the Dawn was seen to move after or about them as after a lover, and not like a woman who forsakes.’ In short, the verse states in unmistakable terms (1) that many days (*bahulâni ahâni*) passed between the appearance of the first morning beams and sunrise, and (2) that these days were faithfully attended by the Dawn, meaning that the whole period was one of continuous Dawn which never vanished during the time. The words as they stand convey no other meaning but this, and we have now to see how far it is intelligible to us.

c8.29

To the commentators the verse is a perfect puzzle. Thus Sâyaṇa does not understand how the word ‘days’ (*ahâni*) can be applied to a period of time anterior to sunrise; for, says he, “The word day (*ahah*) is used only to denote such a period of time as is invested with the light of the Dawn.”¹ Then, again, he is obviously at a loss to understand how a number of days can be said to have elapsed between the first beams of the dawn and sunrise. These were serious difficulties for Sâyaṇa, and the only way to get over them was to force an unnatural sense upon the words, and make them yield some intelligible meaning. This was no difficult task for Sâyaṇa. The word *ahâni*, which means ‘days,’ was the only stumbling block in his way, and instead of taking it in the sense in which it is ordinarily used, without exception, everywhere in the Ṛig-Veda, he went back to its root-meaning, and interpreted it as equivalent to ‘light’ or ‘splendour.’ *Ahan* is derived from the root *ah* (or philologically *dah*), ‘to burn,’ or ‘shine,’ and *Ahunâ* meaning ‘dawn’ is derived from the same root. Etynologically *aháni* may, therefore, mean splendours; but the question is whether it is so used anywhere, and why we should here give up the ordinary meaning of the word. Sâyaṇa's answer is given above. It is because the word 'day' (*ahan*) can, according to him, be applied only to a period after sunrise and before sunset. But this reasoning is not sound, because in the Ṛig-Veda, VI, 9, 1, *ahaḥ* is applied to the dark as well as to the bright period of time, for the verse says, "There is a dark day (*ahaḥ*)" and a bright day (*ahaḥ*)." This shows that the Vedic poets were in the habit of using the word *ahaḥ* (day) to denote a period of time devoid of the light of the sun.¹ Sâyaṇa knew this, and in his commentary on I, 185, 9, he expressly says that the word *ahaḥ* may include night. His real difficulty was different, *viz.*, the impossibility of supposing that a period of several days could have elapsed between the first appearance of light and sunrise, and this difficulty seems to have been experienced even by Western scholars. Thus Prof. Ludwig materially adopts Sâyaṇa's view and interprets the verse to mean that the splendours of the dawn were numerous, and that they appear either before sunrise, or, if *prâchînam* be differently interpreted, 'in the east' at the rising of the sun. Roth and Grassmann seem to interpret *prâchînam* in the same way. Griffith translates *aháni* by 'mornings' and *prâchînam* by 'aforetime.' His rendering of the verse runs thus:—"Great is, in truth, the number of the mornings, which were aforetime at the sun's uprising; since thou, O Dawn, hast been beheld repairing as to thy love, as one no more to leave him." But Griffith does not explain what he understands by the expression, “a number of mornings which were aforetime at the sun’s uprising.”

c8.30

¹ उषःप्रकाशयुक्तस्यैव कालस्याहःशब्दव्यवहारात्।

c8.31

¹ Ṛig. VI. 9, 1,—अहश्च कृष्णमहरर्जुनं च वि वर्तेते रजसी वेद्याभिः। Also cf. T. S. III, 3, 4, 1,—एतद्वा अह्नो रूपं यद्रात्रिः। Similarly in T. S. II, 3, 9, 1, the phrase शमहोभ्याम् (I, 3, 9, 1) is thus explained:— शमहोभ्यामिति निनयतयहोरात्राभ्यामेव।

c8.32

The case is, therefore, reduced to this. The word *ahan*, of which *ahâni* (days) is a plural form, can be ordinarily interpreted to mean (1) a period of time between sunrise and sunset; (2) a nycthemeron, as when we speak of 360 days of the year; or (3) a measure of time to mark a period of 24 hours, irrespective of the fact whether the sun is above or below the horizon, as when we speak of the long Arctic night of 30 days. Are we then to abandon all these meanings, and understand *ahâni* to mean ‘splendours’ in the verse under consideration? The only difficulty is to account for the interval of many days between the appearance of the banner of the Dawn on the horizon and the emergence of the sun’s orb over it; and this difficulty vanishes if the description be taken to refer to the dawn in the Polar or Circum-Polar regions. That is the real key to the meaning of this and similar other passages, which will be noted hereafter; and in its absence a number of artificial devices have been made use of to make these passages somehow intelligible to us. But now nothing of the kind is necessary. As regards the word ‘days,’ it has been observed that we often speak ‘a night of several days,’ or ‘a night of several months’ when describing the Polar phenomena. In expressions like these the word ‘day’ or ‘month’ simply denotes a measure of time, equivalent to ‘twenty-four hours,’ or ‘thirty days;’ and there is nothing unusual in the exclamation of the Rig-Vedic poet that “many were the days between the first beams of the dawn and actual sunrise.” We have also seen that, at the Pole, it is quite possible to mark the periods of twenty-four hours by the rotations of the celestial sphere or the circum-polar stars, and these could be or rather must have been termed ‘days’ by the inhabitants of the place. In the first chapter of the Old Testament we are told that God created the heaven and the earth and also light "on the first day;" while the sun was created on the fourth "to divide the day from the night and to rule the day." Here the word 'day' is used to denote a period of time even before the sun was created; and, *a fortiori*, there can be no impropriety in using it to denote a period of time before sunrise. We need not, therefore, affect a hypercritical spirit in examining the Vedic expression in question. If Sâyaṇa did it, it was because he did not know as much about the Polar regions as we now do. We have no such excuse, and must, therefore, accept the meaning which follows from the natural construction and reading of the sentence.

c8.33

It is therefore clear that the verse in question (VII, 76, 3) expressly describes a dawn continuously lasting for many days, which is possible only in the Arctic regions. I have discussed the passage at so much length because the history of its interpretation clearly shows how certain passages in the Rig-Veda, which are unintelligible to us in spite of their simple diction, have been treated by commentators, who know not what to make of them if read in a natural way. But to proceed with the subject in hand, we have seen that the Polar dawn could be divided into periods of 24 hours owing to the circuits it makes round the horizon. In such a case we can very well speak of these divisions as so many day-long dawns of 24 hours each, and state that so many of them are past and so many are yet to come, as has been done in the verse (I, 113, 10) discussed above. We may also say that so many day-long dawns have passed, and yet the sun has not risen, as in (I, 28, 9, a verse addressed to Varuṇa, wherein the poet asks for the following boon from the deity :—

c8.34

*Para ṛiṇâ sâvîr adha mat-kṛitâni*
*mâ aham râjan anya-kṛitena bhojam |*
*Avyuṣṭâ in nu bhûyasîr uṣhâsa*
*â no jivân Varuṇa tâsu shâdhi ||*

c8.35

Literally translated this means "Remove far the debts (sins) incurred by me. May I not, O King ! be affected by others' doings. Verily, many dawns (have) not fully (vi) flashed forth. O Varuṇa ! direct that we may be alive during them."¹ The first part of this verse contains a prayer usually addressed to Gods, and we have nothing to say with respect to it, so far as the subject in hand is concerned. The only expression necessary to be discussed is *bhûyasîḥ uṣhâsaḥ avyuṣṭâḥ* in the third quarter of the verse. The first two words present no difficulty. They mean 'many dawns.' Now *avyuṣṭa* is a negative participle from *vyuṣṭa*, which again is derived from *uṣhṭa* with *vi* prefixed. I have referred to the distinction between *uṣhas* and *vyuṣṭi* suggested by the three-fold or the five-fold division of the dawn. *Vyuṣṭi*, according to the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa, means 'day,' or rather 'the flashing forth of the dawn into sunrise'; and the word *a + vi + uṣhṭa*, therefore, means "not-fully-flashed-forth into sunrise." But Sâyaṇa and others do not seem to have kept in view this distinction between the meanings of *uṣhas* and *vyuṣṭi*; or if they did, they did not know or had not in their mind the phenomenon of the long continuous dawn in the Arctic regions, a dawn, that lasted for several day-long periods of time before the sun's orb appeared on the horizon. The expression, *bhûyasîḥ uṣhâsaḥ avyuṣṭâḥ*, which literally means "many dawns have not dawned, or fully flashed forth," was, therefore, a riddle to these commentators. Every dawn, they saw, was followed by sunrise; and they could not, therefore, understand how ‘many dawns’ could be described as “not-fully-flashed-forth.” An explanation was thus felt to be a necessity, and this was obtained by converting, in sense, the past passive participle vi-uṣṭa into a future participle; and the expression in question was translated as meaning, “during the dawns (or days) that have not yet dawned,” or, in other words, “in days to come.” But the interpretation is on the face of it strained and artificial. If future days were intended, the idea could have been more easily and briefly expressed. The poet is evidently speaking of things present, and, taking vi-uṣṭa to denote what it literally signifies, we can easily and naturally interpret the expression to mean that though many dawns, meaning many day-long portions of time during which the dawn lasted, have passed, yet it is not vyuṣṭa, that is, the sun’s orb has not yet emerged from below the horizon, and that Varuṇa should protect the worshipper under the circumstances.

c8.36

¹ Ṛig. II, 28, 9,—पर ऋणा सावीरध मत्कृतानि माहं राजनन्यकृतेन भोजम् । अव्युष्टा इनु भूयसीरुषास आ नो जीवान्वरुण तासु शाधि ॥

c8.37.1

There are many other expressions in the Ṛig-Veda which further strengthen the same view. Thus corresponding to bhūyasiḥ in the above passage, we have the adjective purviḥ (many) used in IV, 19, 8 and VI, 28, 1, to denote the number of the dawns, evidently shewing that numerically more than one dawn is intended. The dawns are again not infrequently addressed in the plural number in the Ṛig-Veda, and the fact is well-known to all Vedic scholars. Thus in I, 92, which is a dawn-hymn, the bard opens his song with the characteristically emphatic exclamation, “these (tāḥ) are those (tyāḥ) dawns (uṣasaḥ), which have made their appearance on the horizon,” and the same expression again occurs in VII, 78, 3. Yāska explains the plural number uṣasaḥ by considering it to be used only honorifically (Nirukta XII, 7); while Sāyaṇa interprets it as referring to the number of divinities that preside over the morn. The Western scholars have not made any improvement on these explanations; and Prof. Max Muller is simply content with observing that the Vedic bards, when speaking of the dawn, did sometimes use the plural just as we would use the singular number! But a little reflection will show that neither of these explanations is satisfactory. If the plural is honorific why is it changed into singular only a few lines after in the same hymn? Surely the poet does not mean to address the Dawn respectfully only at the outset, and then change his manner of address and assume a familiar tone.

c8.37.2

This is not, however, the only objection to Yâska's explanation. Various similes are used by the Vedic poets to describe the appearance of the Dawns on the horizon, and an examination of these similes will convince any one that the plural number, used in reference to the Dawn, cannot be merely honorific. Thus in the second line of I, 92, 1, the Dawns are compared to a number of 'warriors' (dhṛiṣhṇavaḥ), and in the third verse of the same hymn they are likened to 'women (nârīḥ) active in their occupations.' They are said to appear on the horizon like 'waves of waters' (apâm na urmayaḥ) in VI, 64, 1; or like 'pillars planted at a sacrifice' (adhvareṣhu svaravaḥ) in IV, 51, 2. We are again told that they work like 'men arrayed' (visho na yuktâḥ), or advance like 'troops of cattle' (gavâm na sargâḥ), in VII, 79, 2, and IV, 51, 8, respectively. They are described as all 'alike' (sadṛishīḥ); and are said to be of 'one mind' (sañjânante), or 'acting harmoniously' in IV, 51, 6, and VII, 76, 5. In the last verse the poet again informs us that they 'do not strive against each other' (mithaḥ na yatante), though they live jointly in the 'same enclosure' (samâne urve). Finally in X, 88, 18, the poet distinctly asks the question, "How many fires, how many suns and how many dawns (uṣhâsaḥ) are there?" If the Dawn were addressed in plural simply t of respect for the deity, where was the necessity of informing us that they do not quarrel though collected in the same place?

c8.37.3

The expressions ‘waves of waters,’ or ‘men arrayed’ &c., are again too definite to be explained away as honorific. Sâyaṇa seems to have perceived this difficulty, and has, probably for the same reason, proposed an explanation slightly different from that of Yâska. But, fortunately, Sâyaṇa’s explanation does not solve the difficulty, as the question still remains, why the deities presiding over the dawn should be more than one in number. The only other explanation put forward, so far as I know, is that the plural number refers to the dawns on successive days during the year, as we perceive them in the temperate or the tropical zone. On this theory there would be 360 dawns in a year, each followed by the rising of the sun every day. This explanation may appear plausible at the first sight. But on a closer examination it will be found that the expressions used in the hymns cannot be made to reconcile with this theory. For, if 360 dawns, all separated by intervals of 24 hours, were intended by the plural number used in the Vedic verses, no poet, with any propriety, would speak of them, as he does in I, 92, 1, by using the double pronoun etâḥ and tyâḥ, as if he was pointing out to a physical phenomenon before him; nor can we understand how 360 dawns, spread over the whole year, can be described as advancing like ‘men arrayed’ for battle.

c8.37.4

It is again absurd to describe the 360 dawns of the year as being collected in the ‘same enclosure’ and ‘not striving against or quarrelling with each other.’ We are thus forced to the conclusion that the Rig-Veda speaks of a team, or a group of dawns, unbroken or uninterrupted by sunlight, so that, if we be so minded, we can regard them as constituting a single long continuous dawn. This is in perfect accord with the statement discussed above, viz., that many days passed between the first appearance of light on the horizon and the uprising of the sun (VII, 76, 3). We cannot, therefore, accept the explanation of consecutive dawns, nor that of Yâska, nor of Sâyaṇa regarding the use of the plural number in this case. The fact is that the Vedic dawn represents one long physical phenomenon which can be spoken of in plural by supposing it to be split up into smaller day-long portions. It is thus that we find Uṣas addressed sometimes in the plural, and sometimes in the singular number. There is no other explanation on which we can account for and explain the various descriptions of the dawn found in the different hymns.

c8.38.1

But to clinch the matter, the Taittirîya Samhitâ, IV, 3, 11, expressly states that the dawns are thirty sisters, or, in other words, they are thirty in number, and that they go round and round in five groups, reaching the same appointed place and having the same banner for all. The whole of this Anuvâka may be said to be practically a dawn-hymn of 15 verses, which are used as Mantras for the laying down of certain emblematical bricks called the ‘dawn-bricks’ on the sacrificial altar. There are sixteen such bricks to be placed on the altar, and the Anuvâka in question gives 15 Mantras, or verses, to be used on the occasion, the 16th being recorded elsewhere. These 15 verses, together with their Brâhmaṇa (T. S., V, 3, 4, 7), are so important for our purpose that I have appended to this chapter the original passages, with their translation, comparing the version in the Taittirîya Samhitâ with that of the Atharva-Veda, in the case of those verses which are found in the latter. The first verse of the section or the Anuvâka, is used for laying down the first dawn-brick, and it speaks only of a single dawn first appearing on the horizon. In the second verse we have, however, a couple dawns mentioned as ‘dwelling in the same abode.’ A third dawn is spoken in the third verse, followed by the fourth and the fifth dawn. The five dawns are then said to have five sisters each, exclusive of themselves, thus raising the total number of dawns to thirty.

c8.38.2

These ‘thirty sisters’ (*trimshat svasârah*) are then described as ‘going round’ (*parî yanti*) in groups of six each, keeping up to the same goal (*nishkṛitam*). Two verses later on, the worshipper asks that he and his followers should be blessed with the same concord as is observed amongst these dawns. We are then told that one of these five principal dawns is the child of Ṛita, the second upholds the greatness of Waters, the third moves in the region of Sûrya, the fourth in that of Fire or Dharma, and the fifth is ruled by Savitṛi, evidently showing that the dawns are not the dawns of consecutive days. The last verse of the *Anuvâka* sums up the description by stating that the dawn, though it shines forth in various forms, is but *one* in reality. Throughout the whole *Anuvâka* there is no mention of the rising of the sun or the appearance of sun-light, and the *Brâhmaṇa* makes the point clear by stating “There was a time, when all this was neither day nor night, being in an undistinguishable state. It was then that the Gods perceived these dawns and laid them down, *then* there was light; therefore, it brightens to him and destroys his darkness for whom these (dawn-bricks) are placed.” The object of this passage is to explain how and why the dawn-bricks came to be laid down with these Mantras, and it gives the ancient story of thirty dawns being perceived by the Gods, not on consecutive days, but during the period of time when it was neither night nor day.

c8.38.3

This, joined with the express statement at the end of the *Anuvâka* that in reality it is but one dawn, is sufficient to prove that the thirty dawns mentioned in the *Anuvâka* were continuous and not consecutive. But, if a still more explicit authority be needed it will be found in the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa, II, 5, 6, 5. This is an old Mantra, and not a portion of the explanatory Brâhmaṇa, and is, therefore, as good an authority as any of the verses quoted above. It is addressed to the Dawns and means “These very Dawns are those that first shone forth, the Goddesses make five forms; eternal (shashvatîḥ), (they) are not separated (na avaprijyanti), nor do (they) terminate (na gamanti antam).”¹ The ‘five forms’ here referred to correspond with the division of 30 dawns into 5 groups of 6 each, made in the Taittirîya Saṁhitâ, after the manner of sacrificial ṣaḷ-ahas, or groups of six days; and we are expressly told that the dawns, which make these 5 forms, are continuous, unseparated, or uninterrupted. In the Ṛig-Veda I, 152, 4, the garment of the lover of the dawns (lit. the maidens, kanînâm jâram) is described as ‘inseparable’ and ‘wide’ (an-avapṛigṇa and vitata), and reading this in the light of the aforesaid Mantra from the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa we are led to conclude that in the Ṛig-Veda itself the dawny garment of the sun, or the garment, which the dawns, as mothers, weave for him (cf.

c8.38.4

V, 47, 6), is considered as ‘wide’ and ‘continuous.’ Translated into common language this means that the dawn described in the Ṛig-Veda was a long and continuous phenomenon. In the Atharva-Veda (VII, 22, 2) the dawns are described as sachetasaḥ and samîchîḥ, which means that they are ‘harmonious’ and ‘walk together’ and not separately. The first expression is found in the Ṛig-Veda, but not the second, though it could be easily inferred, from the fact that the dawns are there described as “collected in the same enclosure.” Griffith renders samîchîḥ by ‘a closely gathered band’ and translates the verse thus:—“The Bright one hath ent forth the Dawns, a closely gathered band, immaculate, unanimous, brightly refulgent in their homes.”¹ Here all the adjectives of the dawns clearly indicate a group of undivided dawns acting harmoniously; and yet, strange to say, Griffith, who translates correctly, misses the spirit altogether. We have thus sufficient direct authority for holding that it is a ‘team,’ or, in Griffith’s words, ‘a closely gathered band’ of thirty continuous dawns that is described in the Vedic hymns, and not the evanescent dawn of the temperate or the tropical zone, either single or as a series of consecutive dawns.

c8.39

¹ Taitt. Br. II, 5, 6, 5,—इमा एव ता उषसो या प्रथमा व्यौच्छन्। ता ड़ेभ्यः कुर्वते पंच रूपा। शश्वतीर्नावपृञ्यंति न गमन्त्यन्तम्॥

c8.40

¹ Ath. Veda, VII, 22, 2,—ऋचः समीचीरुषसः समैरयन् । अरेपसः सचेतसः स्वसरे मन्युमत्तमाश्चिते गोः ॥

c8.41

It is interesting to examine how Sâyaṇa explains the existence of as many as thirty dawns, before we proceed to other authorities. In his commentary on the Taittirîya Saṃhitâ IV, 3, 11, he tells us that the first dawn spoken of in the first verse in the Anuvâka, is the dawn at the beginning of the creation, when every thing was undistinguishable according to the Brâhmaṇa. The second dawn in the second verse is said to be the ordinary dawn that we see every day. So far it was all right; but the number of dawns soon outgrew the number of the kinds of dawn known to Sâyaṇa. The third, fourth and fifth verses of the Anuvâka describe three more dawns, and Sâyaṇa was at last forced to explain that though the dawn was one yet by its Yogic or occult powers it assumed these various shapes! But the five dawns multiplied into thirty sisters in the next verse, and Sâyaṇa finally adopted the explanation that thirty separate dawns represented the thirty consecutive dawns of one month. But, why only thirty dawns of one month out of 360 dawns of a year should thus be selected in these Mantras is nowhere explained. The explanations, besides being mutually inconsistent, again conflict with the last verse in the Anuvâka, with the Brâhmaṇa or the explanation given in the Saṃhitâ itself, and with the passage from the Taittirîya Brâhmaṇa quoted above. But Sâyaṇa was writing under a firm belief that the Vedic dawn was the same as he and other Vedic scholars like Yâska perceived it in the tropical zone; and the wonder is, not that he has given us so many contradictory explanations, but that he has been able to suggest so many apparently plausible explanations as the exigencies of the different Mantras required. In the light of advancing knowledge about the nature of the dawn at the North Pole, and the existence of man on earth before the last Glacial epoch, we should, therefore, have no hesitation in accepting more intelligible and rationalistic view of the different passages descriptive of the dawns in the Vedic literature. We are sure Sâyaṇa himself would have welcomed a theory more comprehensive and reasonable than any advanced by him, if the same could have been suggested to him in his own day. Jyotiṣh or astronomy has always been considered to be the ‘eye of the Veda,’¹ and as with the aid of the telescope this eye now commands a wider range than previously it will be our own fault if we fail to utilise the knowledge so gained to elucidate those portions of our sacred books which are still unintelligible.

c8.42

¹ Cf. Shikṣhâ, 41-42,—छंदः पादौ तु वेदस्य हस्तौ कल्पोऽथ पठ्यते । ज्योतिषामयनं चक्षुर्निऋक्तं श्रोत्रमुच्यते ॥ शिक्षा घ्राणं तु वेदस्य मुखं व्याकरणं स्मृतम् । तस्मात् सांगमधीत्यैव ब्रह्मलोके महीयते ॥

c8.43.1

But to proceed with the subject, it may be urged that it is only the Taittirîya Saṃhitâ that gives us the number of the dawns, and that it would not be proper to mix up these statements with the statements contained in the hymns of the Ṛig-Veda, and draw a conclusion from both taken together. The Taittirîya Saṃhitâ treats of sacrificial tes, and the Mantras relating to the dawn-bricks may not be regarded as being originally connected. The fact that only some of these are found in the Atharva-Veda Samhita, might lend some support to this view. But a critical study of the Anuvâka, will remove all these doubts. The ‘thirty sisters’ are not mentioned one by one, leaving it to the hearer, or the reader, to make up the total, and ascertain the final number for himself. The sixth verse in the Anuvâka expressly mentions ‘the thirty sisters’, and is, by itself, sufficient to prove that in ancient days the number of dawns was considered to be thirty. But if an authority from the Rig-Veda be still needed, we have it in VI, 59, 6, where Dawn is described as having traversed ‘thirty steps’ (trimshat padâni akramît).¹ This statement has, as yet, remained unexplained. ‘A single dawn traversing thirty steps’ is but a paraphrase of the statement that ‘dawns are thirty sisters, keeping to the same goal in their circuits.’ Another verse which has not yet been satisfactorily explained is the Rig-Veda, I, 123, 8.

c8.43.2

It says “The dawns, alike to-day and alike to-morrow, dwell long in the abode of Varuna. Blameless, they forth-with go round (pari yanti) thirty yojanas; each its destined course (kratum).”² The first half of the verse presents no difficulty. In the second we are told that the dawns go round thirty yojanas, each following its own ‘plan,’ which is the meaning of kratu, according to the Petersberg Lexicon. But the phrase ‘thirty yojanas’ has not been as yet satisfactorily explained. Griffith following M. Bergaigne understands it to mean thirty regions or spaces, indicating the whole universe; but there is no authority for this meaning. Sâyaṇa, whom Wilson follows, gives an elaborate astronomical explanation. He says that the sun's rays precede his rising and are visible when the sun is below the horizon by thirty yojanas, or, in other words, the dawn is in advance of the sun by that distance. When dawns are, therefore, said to traverse thirty yojanas, Sâyaṇa understands by it the astronomical phenomenon of the dawn illumining a space of thirty yojanas in advance of the sun, and, that when the dawn, at one place, is over, it is to be found in another place, occupying a space of thirty yojanas in that place. The explanation is very ingenious; and Sâyaṇa also adds that the dawns are spoken of in the plural number in the verse under consideration, because the dawns at different places on the surface of the earth, brought on by the daily motion of the sun, are intended.

c8.43.3

But unfortunately the explanation cannot stand scientific scrutiny. Sâyaṇa says that the sun travels 5,059 yojanas round the Meru in 24 hours; and as Meru means the earth and the circumference of the earth is now known to be about 24,877 miles, a yojana would be about 4.9, or in round number, about 5 miles. Thirty such yojanas will, therefore, be 150 miles; while the first beams of the dawn greet us on the horizon when the sun is not less than 16° below the horizon. Taking one degree equal to 60 miles, 16° would mean 960 miles, a distance far in excess of the thirty yojanas of Sâyaṇa. Another objection to Sâyaṇa's explanation is that the Vedic bard is evidently speaking of a phenomenon present before him, and not mentally following the astronomical dawns at different places produced by the daily rotation of the earth on its axis. The explanation is again inapplicable to ‘thirty steps (padâni)’ of the dawn expressly mentioned in VI, 59, 6. Therefore, the only alternative left is to take the phrases ‘thirty yojanas,’ ‘thirty sisters,’ and ‘thirty steps’ as different versions of one and the same fact, viz., the circuits of the dawn along the Polar horizon. The phrase ‘each its destined course’ also becomes intelligible in this case, for though thirty dawns complete thirty rounds, each may well be described as following its own definite course. The words *pari yanti* in the text literally apply to a circular (*pari*) motion, (cf. the words *pari-ukṣaṇam*, *pari-staraṇam*, &c.);

c8.43.4

and the same term is used in the Taittirîya Saṃhitâ with reference to ‘thirty sisters’. The word *yojana* primarily means ‘a chariot’ (VIII, 72, 6), and then it came to denote ‘a distance to be accomplished without unharnessing the horses’, or what we, in the vernacular, call a ‘*ṭappâ*.’ Now this *ṭappâ*, or ‘the journey to be accomplished without unharnessing the horses’, may be a day’s journey, and Prof. Max Muller has in one place interpreted the word *yojana* in this way.¹ In V, 54, 5, the Maruts are said “to have extended their greatness as far as the sun extends his daily course,” and the word in the original for ‘daily course’ is *yojanam*. Accepting this meaning, we can interpret the expression ‘the dawns forthwith go round (*pari yanti*) thirty yojanas’ to mean that the dawns complete thirty daily rounds as at the North Pole. That circular motion is here intended is further evident from III, 61, 3, which says, in distinct terms, “Wending towards the same goal (*samânam artham*), O Newly-born (Dawn)! turn on like a wheel (*chakram iva â vavṛtsva*).”² Although the word *navyasi* (newly-born) is here in the vocative case, yet the meaning is that the dawn, ever anew or becoming new every day, revolves like a wheel. Now a wheel may either move in a perpendicular plane, like the wheel of a chariot, or in a horizontal plane like the potter's wheel. But the first of these two motions can not be predicated of the dawn anywhere on the surface of the earth.

c8.43.5

The light of the morning is, everywhere, confined to the horizon, as described in the Rig-Veda, VII, 80, 1, which speaks of the dawn as "unrolling the two *rajasî*, which border on each other (*samante*), and revealing all things."¹ No dawn, whether in the frigid, the temperate, or the tropical zone can, therefore, be seen travelling, like the sun, from east to west, over the head of the observer in a perpendicular plane. The only possible wheel-like motion is, therefore, along the horizon, and this can be witnessed only in regions near the Pole. A dawn in the temperate or the tropical zone is visible only for a short time on the eastern horizon, and is swallowed up, in the same place, by the rays of the rising sun. It is only in the Polar regions that we see the morning lights revolving along the horizon for some day-long periods of time, and if the wheel-like motion of the dawn, mentioned in III, 61, 2, has any meaning at all, we must take it to refer to the revolving splendours of the dawn in the Arctic regions previously described. The expressions "reaching the appointed place (*niṣh-kṛitam*) day by day" (I, 123, 9), and "wending ever and ever to the same goal" (III, 61, 3) are also ill-suited to describe the dawn in latitudes below the Arctic circle;

First 53 of 160 passages. Read on

Linked texts (10)